O. Winston Link: The Presence of the Train

In reexamining some of the iconic images of O. Winston Link, I am struck by a particular issue of rail photo composition that has been interesting me for some time, the relationship between the train and the rest of the image. Is there a relationship at all, are they connected in the composition?

Consider the first image of people playing in a river as a train roars by. Well, that is just it; the train roars by but the people do not notice. That is OK to my senses; the river connects the people and the bridge with the train passing over it. To some extent the scene holds together.


But what of the second scene, also of swimmers? In this case the swimming/ people part of the image occupies its own, fenced space, and the train is outside of it. More than just outside, separated by the fence and some foliage, and no one gives it any heed. Two parts of the scene stuck together, as if by happenstance. The train is not "of" the swimming scene, it is an appendage.


An exagger- ation? Well, how about the third scene, the famous drive-in photo? A cluster of cars watching a movie with an airplane. The train passing - does its chuffing drown out the sound inside the cars? Does anyone notice it go by? At least compositionally its lengthy plume helps bring added attention to it, pulling the eye away from the plane (or away from the engine?).



The fourth image, the gas station shot, I find the most striking of all. Look at the action in the shot! The train is huge, so huge that the shot cannot contain it, showing neither the nose nor the cab, much less the tender or train. And it seems to be feet away from the remainder of the scene. And yet, no one notices it go by. How extraordinary!

The attendant and the couple are both focused (intently?) on the delivery of gasoline to the car. Perhaps this is a greatly foreshadowed metaphor for how our society today perceived cars and trains, the former a vital force to be kept fueled, the latter easily ignored despite its great presence? A massive stretch, and I don't believe that is the intent; too early in history for that, I think, and Link was not know for that sort of social commentary. But the presence, or shall I say absence, of the train in the story of the image is, well, astounding!

The last image is a different sort of discon- nection, one of minor presence. The scene is the interior of a hardware store, and it just happens that there is a sizable steam engine outside the window, so large we can only see the number and parts of two drivers. It is literally outside the scene, peeking in, but actually it isn't, it is merely stopped outside, minding its own business, with no apparent connection to or interest in the people and goods inside. What is the connection between train and scene?

These images seem to combine train and scene by happenstance. With the exception of the first, there are no obvious reasons why a train should be present in any of the scenes, not by geography or transportation need. Their presence is accidental, or perhaps coincidental; they are in the scene but not so much a part of it.

Of course, many or most of Link's images are not composed in this way. But I was struck by the parallels here, particularly noticeable to me because several of these images I think of as being the "most iconic" of his work. The question of connection between train and environment is one I intend to return to with reference to contemporary images.

[NOTE: I have tried twice to reach the copyright holder, Link's son, to receive permission to use these images here. On the basis of those efforts and my reading of the doctrine of fair use (in particular the "for purposes such as criticism, comment" phrase, combined with the non-profit nature of this site) I conclude that my use of these images is lawful and appropriate.]